• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Are Buddhist and Hindu Scriptures Inaccurate?

Martin

Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
I see it as process-based metaphysics (conditions give rise to give rise to other conditions; Pratītyasamutpāda - Wikipedia) rather than substance-based metaphysics such as Brahman. "All phenomena are empty of Self." There is no core substance or Self to be found. It doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it means it can't be found. Therefore, it is best to concentrate and focus on what we can observe: cause and effect.

To me anatta looks like a straightforward negation of Atma, so they're mutually exclusive positions.
And similarly, shunyata is a negation of Brahman.
In terms of practice, you can either look for an absence, or you can look for a presence.
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Yes Tony, you're right about that. I'm wrong. Sorry for my lack of understanding.

All the best Vinayaka.

This quote says it all for me;

".. Every good thing is of God, and every evil thing is from yourselves. Will ye not comprehend? This same truth hath been revealed in all the Scriptures..."

Hope Covid-19 has not been an issue for you and community.

Regards Tony
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Assumo


As you know, both the Buddha and Krishna indicated that from age to age another Buddha arises and Krishna returns to re-establish religion. This is in both scriptures.

If this is true then may we not obtain that information from Their future appearances? I believe this holds the key. For instance Maitreya and Kalki would be quite capable of conveying what is true and what has been misunderstood.

I personally believe this has occurred except that both Maitreya and Kali are One and the same Person.

Interestingly, some popular beliefs have been discarded as erroneous and vain imaginings, while others upheld. One such claim is that Buddha taught that there was one God, but these teachings were lost. Historically this cannot be proven, but if the Spokesperson was indeed Maitreya, then I would entertain no doubt whatsoever about its accuracy.
This gets a little complicated. Krishna came and their are prophecies that he will return as Kalki. But are there prophesies that say he will return as Moses or Muhammad? And then when he did, according to this type of Baha'i reasoning, wouldn't any of them or especially the Buddha be the Kalki Avatar? Then, since the Buddha, we've been expecting the return of Buddha as the Maitreya. So wouldn't that have been Jesus? But, for Baha'is, all these promised ones Kalki, Maitreya and the others all don't get fulfilled until Baha'u'llah? So why wouldn't the next "manifestation" in line be the fulfillment of the prophecies about the return of the one just prior to that one coming?
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Straight up question ... try not to avoid it again. Yes or no? Did the Hindus get it wrong?
Is this a trick question? Many Gods? Reincarnation? So far Baha'is have Hinduism 0 for 2. Why is it that hard of a thing to admit. Do Baha'is think that all the other religions have gotten some things wrong? Yes, that's why their prophet, Baha'u'llah, needed to come. At least that's what they told me. Maybe I heard wrong.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
This gets a little complicated. Krishna came and their are prophecies that he will return as Kalki. But are there prophesies that say he will return as Moses or Muhammad? And then when he did, according to this type of Baha'i reasoning, wouldn't any of them or especially the Buddha be the Kalki Avatar? Then, since the Buddha, we've been expecting the return of Buddha as the Maitreya. So wouldn't that have been Jesus? But, for Baha'is, all these promised ones Kalki, Maitreya and the others all don't get fulfilled until Baha'u'llah? So why wouldn't the next "manifestation" in line be the fulfillment of the prophecies about the return of the one just prior to that one coming?

Hi CG What you say is quite true because in essence they are all one and the same. So for instance Muhammad according to traditions has been reported as saying He was Jesus, so they are all one and the same spiritually. We call the sun by the different days of the week but although there are seven days in name, the sun is in reality one.


“It is clear and evident to thee that all the Prophets are the Temples of the Cause of God, Who have appeared clothed in divers attire. If thou wilt observe with discriminating eyes, thou wilt behold them all abiding in the same tabernacle, soaring in the same heaven, seated upon the same throne, uttering the same speech, and proclaiming the same Faith. Such is the unity of those Essences of being, those Luminaries of infinite and immeasurable splendour. Wherefore, should one of these Manifestations of Holiness proclaim saying: “I am the return of all the Prophets,He verily speaketh the truth.”


The Kitáb-i-Íqán
Bahá’u’lláh

But having said that, they each have designated missions and objectives. For instance the wolf and the lamb shall feed together etc, that was not fulfilled in the time of Christ but would be fulfilled by a future Messiah. Muhammad established Nationhood and Baha’u’llah’s mission is world unity.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Is this a trick question? Many Gods? Reincarnation? So far Baha'is have Hinduism 0 for 2. Why is it that hard of a thing to admit. Do Baha'is think that all the other religions have gotten some things wrong? Yes, that's why their prophet, Baha'u'llah, needed to come. At least that's what they told me. Maybe I heard wrong.

Oh I know that's what they think, as do you. But I gave up on getting straight answers a long time ago. It's another strategy ... when you can't give an answer, don't say anything at all. Surely you've noticed. I asked for an answer on this one half a dozen times. Half a dozen times too many, lol.

Have at it, my man.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
Is this a trick question? Many Gods? Reincarnation? So far Baha'is have Hinduism 0 for 2. Why is it that hard of a thing to admit. Do Baha'is think that all the other religions have gotten some things wrong? Yes, that's why their prophet, Baha'u'llah, needed to come. At least that's what they told me. Maybe I heard wrong.

We believe Baha’u’llah was a Manifestation of God and as such never erred so we believe that anything He has reinterpreted or corrected is true and correct. We cannot give any other answer except what our scriptures say.
 
Last edited:

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
I am talking about how Adam believed in a personal God but didn't follow a personal God. What you said reminded me of Adam.

You’re presupposing a God that gives commandments, rules, wants to be worshiped and obeyed. Hindus have no such concept of God.
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
Everyone is wicked. The Bible describes our heart as desperately wicked.

That’s the Bible, not Hinduism.

“The greatest sin is to call yourself a sinner. You are a child of God. Though gold be covered with mud for centuries, it remains gold. So the pure ‘gold’ of the soul can be covered over with the mud of delusion for aeons, but in its true nature it remains forever undefiled.”
—Paramhansa Yogananda
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
Isnt the desire to be God what caused the fall of Adam and Eve, and the fall of Lucifer?

We are God. Aham Brahmāsmi, “I am Brahman” from the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad in the Yajur Veda. The Vedas were revealed to the rishis, the sages. Brahman is the source of all existence, generally identified with God. Therefore, our true Self is non-different from “God”. Trippy, huh? Am I going to a hell for blasphemy? :D
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Oh I know that's what they think, as do you. But I gave up on getting straight answers a long time ago. It's another strategy ... when you can't give an answer, don't say anything at all. Surely you've noticed. I asked for an answer on this one half a dozen times. Half a dozen times too many, lol.

Have at it, my man.

That would be because we have answered the questions many times.

Regards Tony
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
Is this a trick question? Many Gods? Reincarnation? So far Baha'is have Hinduism 0 for 2. Why is it that hard of a thing to admit. Do Baha'is think that all the other religions have gotten some things wrong? Yes, that's why their prophet, Baha'u'llah, needed to come. At least that's what they told me. Maybe I heard wrong.

Yet Kalki has to come long after Baha'u'llah to restore the dharma that we are losing. It doesn’t mean the previous prophets, messengers, avatars, guy-fridays, or whoever got it wrong or failed. Humans have free will.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
We are God. Aham Brahmāsmi, “I am Brahman” from the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad in the Yajur Veda. The Vedas were revealed to the rishis, the sages. Brahman is the source of all existence, generally identified with God. Therefore, our true Self is non-different from “God”. Trippy, huh? Am I going to a hell for blasphemy? :D

Jesus and the Psalms never said that we are God. “You Are Gods”: What Did Jesus Mean? | Reasons for Jesus

By Steven Bancarz| One of the most confusing verses in the New Testament that often gets twisted in a gnositc/mystical context is something Jesus says in John chapter 10:

“I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?” The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.”

Jesus answered them,

“Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken— do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?John 10:31-36

Jesus is referring to a verse in Psalm 82 verse 6: where it reads:

“I SAID, ‘YOU ARE GODS, SONS OF THE MOST HIGH, ALL OF YOU;’”

As you can imagine, this passage has caused a lot of confusion, especially in the New Age movement. It’s often interpreted gnostically to mean that we are little gods ascending up a ladder of deification, or mystically to mean that God is within all things and is therefore within us. As Deepak Chopra says about this verse:

“I interpreted this as “those who have knowledge of God are God.” In Eastern philosophical systems there’s an established idea of a path through personal consciousness to a collective conscience to a universal conscience, which people call the divine. I concluded that Jesus must have experienced this consciousness,” (1)

In this article we are going to answer a few questions:

  1. Who was this verse addressing?
  2. What did the Pslamist mean when he mean when he called them “gods”?
  3. Why did Jesus bring this verse up?
  4. Was Jesus saying that we are all gods?
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
Anything that separates people from God. Lying and being impolite is not respecting oneself and others.

We are never separated from God. Never were, never will be. Lying and being impolite have karmic consequences but karmic consequences don’t separate us from God.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
We are never separated from God. Never were, never will be. Lying and being impolite have karmic consequences but karmic consequences don’t separate us from God.

We can't stand in the presence of God with our sin, because God is perfect. That's why God sent Jesus, to bridge the gap between God and people.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
And I pointed out that the Upanishads do. Which one is correct? Well obviously the one I believe in.

It was a metaphor describing their position of leadership with people. What does the Bible mean by “you are gods” / "ye are gods" in Psalm 82:6 and John 10:34? | GotQuestions.org

What does the Bible mean by “you are gods” / "ye are gods" in Psalm 82:6 and John 10:34?

Question: "What does the Bible mean by 'you are gods' / 'ye are gods' in Psalm 82:6 and John 10:34?"

Answer:
Let’s start with a look at Psalm 82, the psalm that Jesus quotes in John 10:34. The Hebrew word translated “gods” in Psalm 82:6 is Elohim. It usually refers to the one true God, but it does have other uses. Psalm 82:1 says, “God presides in the great assembly; he gives judgment among the gods.” It is clear from the next three verses that the word “gods” refers to magistrates, judges, and other people who hold positions of authority and rule. Calling a human magistrate a “god” indicates three things: 1) he has authority over other human beings, 2) the power he wields as a civil authority is to be feared, and 3) he derives his power and authority from God Himself, who is pictured as judging the whole earth in verse 8.

This use of the word “gods” to refer to humans is rare, but it is found elsewhere in the Old Testament. For example, when God sent Moses to Pharaoh, He said, “See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh” (Exodus 7:1). This simply means that Moses, as the messenger of God, was speaking God’s words and would therefore be God’s representative to the king. The Hebrew word Elohim is translated “judges” in Exodus 21:6 and 22:8, 9, and 28.

The whole point of Psalm 82 is that earthly judges must act with impartiality and true justice, because even judges must stand someday before the Judge. Verses 6 and 7 warn human magistrates that they, too, must be judged: “I said, `You are gods; you are all sons of the Most High.' But you will die like mere men; you will fall like every other ruler.” This passage is saying that God has appointed men to positions of authority in which they are considered as gods among the people. They are to remember that, even though they are representing God in this world, they are mortal and must eventually give an account to God for how they used that authority.

Now, let’s look at how Jesus uses this passage. Jesus had just claimed to be the Son of God (John 10:25-30). The unbelieving Jews respond by charging Jesus with blasphemy, since He claimed to be God (verse 33). Jesus then quotes Psalm 82:6, reminding the Jews that the Law refers to mere men—albeit men of authority and prestige—as “gods.” Jesus’ point is this: you charge me with blasphemy based on my use of the title “Son of God”; yet your own Scriptures apply the same term to magistrates in general. If those who hold a divinely appointed office can be considered “gods,” how much more can the One whom God has chosen and sent (verses 34-36)?

In contrast, we have the serpent’s lie to Eve in the Garden. His statement, “your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil” (Genesis 3:5), was a half-truth. Their eyes were opened (verse 7), but they did not become like God. In fact, they lost authority, rather than gaining it. Satan deceived Eve about her ability to become like the one true God, and so led her into a lie. Jesus defended His claim to be the Son of God on biblical and semantic grounds—there is a sense in which influential men can be thought of as gods; therefore, the Messiah can rightly apply the term to Himself. Human beings are not “gods” or “little gods.” We are not God. God is God, and we who know Christ are His children.
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
We can't stand in the presence of God with our sin, because God is perfect. That's why God sent Jesus, to bridge the gap between God and people.

I don’t believe that. We don’t believe in sin as you do. Sin is not an offense against God or disobedience of Him (or Her for the Shaktas among us) but rather that hurts or has negative results. It’s called paapa in Sanskrit. It’s the opposite of punya, virtue or good deeds.

But as someone else pointed out, this thread isn’t a Bible discussion. Maybe you should start one comparing the Bible to other scriptures and the validities of each.
 
Top